Loath as I am to pick a fight with or publicly criticize a professional journalist (God knows, we get enough grief from all directions—we’re too far left for the right and too far right for the left, and too everything for the centrists), I have to wonder if Baton Rouge Advocate columnist Dan Fagan has just flat out run out of subject matter or really believes what he writes.
In Thursday’s edition of The Advocate, Fagan seems to actually believe that Governor John Bel Edwards’s mandate that employees with contact with the public wear masks is an infringement upon our personal freedoms. (Read his full column HERE.)
“It’s not about masks,” he sniffs with all the appropriate indignity he can muster. “It’s about freedom,” something he said we had “before the government snatched it from us in broad daylight.”
Good grief.
He should be more offended at the rude manner in which Trump treated New Orleans nurse Sophia Thomas.
Personally, I’m far more offended by the fact that greedy legislators took their per diem pay for the 49 days they were not in session because of the shutdown. If some single black mom had taken a penny of welfare or food stamp payments to which she was not entitled, she would be instantly branded a welfare queen and demand would follow to tighten requirements for welfare recipients and to prosecute offenders. Perhaps Fagan should’ve addressed that little legislative swindle in his column.
What is he, the print edition of Rush Limbaugh? It’s no longer about what we cannot do, he writes, but “what we must do.”
Seriously? Does he understand that there have been 1.3 million confirmed cases in the U.S. as of today and 76,537 deaths attributed directly to the coronavirus so far—that we actually know about?
To put that in perspective, we lost 58,220 American lives in Vietnam and that was over a period of eight years, from 1965 to 1973. The first coronavirus death in the U.S. was on Feb. 26 of this year. Do the math.
Is he aware that 2,135 of those deaths have been right here in Louisiana?
And yes, influenza kills, too. For the six months from Oct. 1, 2019 through April 4, 2020, the Center for Disease Control’s best estimates are between 24,000 and 62,000 deaths from the flu.
Fagan bemoans the shaming of legislators for not wearing masks. Well, I’ve always said our legislators are better known for their avarice than for their common sense and that collectively, they are a few lagers shy of a six-pack.
In his rambling condemnation of what he perceives as an attack on his personal freedom, Fagan is careful to mention that Edwards is a Democrat, that Democrats oppose tort reform (which, of course, has everything to do with face masks), that State Rep. Mandie Landry, also a Democrat, shamed fellow legislators (the Republican ones, of course) for not wearing masks and besides, Landry, an attorney, represents abortion clinics…
To tell you the truth, Fagan’s wasn’t even something one could call circular logic. It was more like meandering logic. But if we’re going to play his game, I think it’s fair to speculate that there are most probably a few Republican lawyers who defend child molesters and ax murderers—or at least they would if a sufficient cash retainer was brought to the table.
But for the moment, let’s just stick to his main theme: freedom.
Do I not deserve the freedom to be presented a meal or any other commodity that I’m spending good money on without the fear that an infected employee may have sneezed on it? It seems only fair to me that I not be unnecessarily exposed by some careless individual who doesn’t really care about me or my family.
But, you say, if I’m that afraid, why don’t I just stay home?
Are you telling me you would impose your demands that I not leave my home? Isn’t that an infringement on the very freedom on which you based your silly argument to begin with?
In most circles, that would be deemed a double standard.
But bottom line is I respectfully disagree that a mandate for those serving the public to wear masks is tantamount to the government coming for my guns, my home, or my first-born or otherwise threatening my freedom.
It is simply an action taken for the greater good of the general public—sort of like restricting livestock in the city limits is a step toward protecting the general public. Like police patrols are for the protection of the public. Like requiring contractors, electricians, plumbers or airline pilots to have a license for their particular craft: you don’t want to expose the public to unnecessary risks.
Let’s leave the conspiracy theories to the experts—like Alex Jones—and let’s stick to informing, not roiling, the public.
There are legitimate concerns about which you can write—concerns like the shooting of innocent joggers, voter suppression and the wrongful convictions of far too many people, just for starters.